TSTP Solution File: NUM740^1 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : NUM740^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.7.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8042.1875MB
% OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Tue May 21 01:15:53 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.20s 0.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 10
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 24 ( 5 unt; 6 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 31 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 87 ( 14 ~; 6 |; 1 &; 60 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 6 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 5 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 1 usr)
% Number of type conns : 6 ( 6 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 6 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 12 ( 0 ^ 12 !; 0 ?; 12 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
frac: $tType ).
thf(decl_22,type,
x: frac ).
thf(decl_23,type,
y: frac ).
thf(decl_24,type,
moref: frac > frac > $o ).
thf(decl_25,type,
eq: frac > frac > $o ).
thf(decl_26,type,
lessf: frac > frac > $o ).
thf(satz48,conjecture,
( ~ ( lessf @ y @ x )
=> ( eq @ y @ x ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',satz48) ).
thf(m,axiom,
( ~ ( moref @ x @ y )
=> ( eq @ x @ y ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m) ).
thf(satz42,axiom,
! [X1: frac,X2: frac] :
( ( moref @ X1 @ X2 )
=> ( lessf @ X2 @ X1 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',satz42) ).
thf(satz38,axiom,
! [X1: frac,X2: frac] :
( ( eq @ X1 @ X2 )
=> ( eq @ X2 @ X1 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',satz38) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ~ ( lessf @ y @ x )
=> ( eq @ y @ x ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[satz48])]) ).
thf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ ( moref @ x @ y )
=> ( eq @ x @ y ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[m]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ~ ( lessf @ y @ x )
& ~ ( eq @ y @ x ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])]) ).
thf(c_0_7,plain,
! [X9: frac,X10: frac] :
( ~ ( moref @ X9 @ X10 )
| ( lessf @ X10 @ X9 ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[satz42])])]) ).
thf(c_0_8,plain,
( ( moref @ x @ y )
| ( eq @ x @ y ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ ( lessf @ y @ x ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_10,plain,
! [X1: frac,X2: frac] :
( ( lessf @ X2 @ X1 )
| ~ ( moref @ X1 @ X2 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
thf(c_0_11,plain,
! [X7: frac,X8: frac] :
( ~ ( eq @ X7 @ X8 )
| ( eq @ X8 @ X7 ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[satz38])])]) ).
thf(c_0_12,plain,
( ( moref @ x @ y )
| ( eq @ x @ y ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
thf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
~ ( moref @ x @ y ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
thf(c_0_14,plain,
! [X1: frac,X2: frac] :
( ( eq @ X2 @ X1 )
| ~ ( eq @ X1 @ X2 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
thf(c_0_15,plain,
eq @ x @ y,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
thf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ ( eq @ y @ x ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_17,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.11 % Problem : NUM740^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.7.0.
% 0.13/0.13 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.13/0.33 % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.33 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.33 % DateTime : Mon May 20 05:16:07 EDT 2024
% 0.13/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.46 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.20/0.46 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/eprover-ho --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.20/0.47 # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.20/0.47 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.47 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.47 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.47 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.47 # Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.47 # Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.47 # ho_unfolding_6 with pid 18788 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Result found by ho_unfolding_6
% 0.20/0.47 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.47 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.47 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.47 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.47 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.20/0.47 # Search class: HGUNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.47 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.47 # Starting new_ho_10 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.47 # new_ho_10 with pid 18792 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Result found by new_ho_10
% 0.20/0.47 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.47 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.47 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.47 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.47 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.20/0.47 # Search class: HGUNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.47 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.47 # Starting new_ho_10 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.47 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.47 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.20/0.47
% 0.20/0.47 # Proof found!
% 0.20/0.47 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/0.47 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.20/0.47 # Parsed axioms : 10
% 0.20/0.47 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Initial clauses : 11
% 0.20/0.47 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 6
% 0.20/0.47 # Initial clauses in saturation : 5
% 0.20/0.47 # Processed clauses : 12
% 0.20/0.47 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # ...remaining for further processing : 12
% 0.20/0.47 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Generated clauses : 3
% 0.20/0.47 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2
% 0.20/0.47 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Paramodulations : 2
% 0.20/0.47 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # NegExts : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # ...of those cached : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.47 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.47 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.47 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.47 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.47 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.47 # Current number of processed clauses : 6
% 0.20/0.47 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.20/0.47 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.20/0.47 # Non-unit-clauses : 2
% 0.20/0.47 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.20/0.47 # ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Current number of archived clauses : 6
% 0.20/0.47 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Condensation attempts : 12
% 0.20/0.47 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.20/0.47 # Termbank termtop insertions : 384
% 0.20/0.47 # Search garbage collected termcells : 48
% 0.20/0.47
% 0.20/0.47 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.47 # User time : 0.004 s
% 0.20/0.47 # System time : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.47 # Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.20/0.47 # Maximum resident set size: 1576 pages
% 0.20/0.47
% 0.20/0.47 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.47 # User time : 0.005 s
% 0.20/0.47 # System time : 0.003 s
% 0.20/0.47 # Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.20/0.47 # Maximum resident set size: 1716 pages
% 0.20/0.47 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.20/0.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------